Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

Provisional attachment under PMLA Section 5 upheld; extortion, land fraud and unexplained funds deemed proceeds of crime.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....AT upheld the provisional attachment order under the PMLA, holding that appellants A1-A3 were prima facie involved in the scheduled (predicate) offence and consequent money laundering. Investigations pursuant to FIRs and ECIR established that they extorted money using muscle power, procured land documents, manipulated revenue records, and sold properties, thereby generating "proceeds of crime" and projecting them as untainted. The quantification of proceeds of crime was based on these findings. AT noted that appellants failed to disclose any legitimate source of funds or produce evidence for the purchase of the attached properties. Distinguishing reliance on the SC order cited, AT found no ground to interfere with the impugned order. The appeals were dismissed.....